Talk:Ladin language: Difference between revisions

Section 1

You would be surprised how many people refer to Ladin in Italy as Ladino. The thing is, in Italian, Ladin is Ladino! And let's not forget that the Dolomites are in Italy (close to the Austrian border), therefore, we must make clear that we understand and accept that Italians refer to Ladin as Ladino (check the Italian link for Ladin and you can see for yourselves), but since this article is in English, we refer to it as Ladin.

Question: Does anyone know how is Ladin in German? We could mention it as well.

--Pinnecco 15:46, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Answer: Ladinisch (click on the German interwiki link).  Andreas  ^(T) 19:53, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Ladin in Deutsch

Ladin in German is Ladinisch.

The modern Ladins are tri-lingual. They grow up speaking Ladin at home, but when they enter school half of their courses are conducted in Italian and the other half in German.

The Ladin flag is solid bars top to bottom: blue, white and green. Blue is for the sky over Ladinia. White is for the snow. Green is for the alpine meadows.

Is it right that they even speak four languages, at least if you count the South Tyrole dialect of German as a language of its own?--Unoffensive text or character 16:07, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

They speak Ladin and Italian as native speakers, and German and the Southtyrolian dialect from pretty badly to proficiently, depending on the area and the individual. Regards, --JohnnyRoland (talk) 20:58, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

it presents connections...

This passage: "It presents connections with the Swiss Romansh and Friulian" sounds strange to me, but then I am not a native speaker of English. I will rephrase it, but please feel free to revert my change.--Unoffensive text or character 16:09, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I am an English native speaker and you are correct, that is not an English idiom. --Paolorausch (talk) 19:11, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Translations and Comparisons?

I'm not competitent to do the following, otherwise I'd do it myself. Could anyone provide a side-by-side comparison of text in Ladin, Italian, and English as a sample? This is nicely done in the article on the Judeo-Spanish Ladino language article. Perhaps a song (as was done in the Ladino article), or a passage from the Bible...? I find it interesting and helpful to compare passages translated side-by-side like that. Xenophon777 12:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

the alphabet

For some time now there has been a page at Ladin alphabet that gives an incorrect listing of the letters of the alphabet. That it is incorrect can be seen by viewing any Ladin text such as those at http://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/lld/ . Another site led me to this PDF, which makes me believe that Ladin is a series of dialects with no standard spelling system. I would suggest that anything given as an alphabet should be sourced directly to a document such as this one and qualified if necessary by saying that the spelling system isn't unified. I cannot find any simple listing of the letters of the alphabet in that document or any other, however. Soap ^Talk/_{Contributions} 23:14, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Phonology

I added phonology tables and ask those who known the language and the theory of phonology to have a look at it. I am aware that there are differences in the various local dialects. Unfortunately, I don't know any ladin, I just copied from the source.

The "ë" vowel is used in some areas but is abandoned in Standard Ladin. I included it in the phonologic table, thus departing from the standard.  Andreas  ^(T) 20:02, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

/h/ phoneme

The /h/ phoneme is, according to the source, a glottal fricatlive like in English, but it is said that "al à endere valour fonetich te paroles con na basa germanica olache al vegn pronunzié plu o manco desche l -ch- todesch." Does this mean that /h/ is a guttural as in German "ach" or in Scottish "loch"? The examples given are: puhin, troht, zah, sciah, rehl.  Andreas  ^(T) 21:01, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, they are saying that the voiceless velar fricative (the German ach-Laut) is used in words with a German etymology and represented by <h>. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 19:16, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

/ë/

You will find audio files for the word vërt here. This phoneme is not included in the official standard but occurs in the Val Gardëina dialect, see the table 3.2 'Grafems vocalics di idioms che toma demez tl ladin standard'. As far as I understand, the trema is used in the Fodom, Gherdeina, and Val Badia dialects but not in standard Ladin.  Andreas  ^(T) 17:57, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Nones and Solandro

Nones and Solandro are considered by some to be dialects of the Ladin lanuguge, while others disagree. See it:Nones about the socalled "Ladin queston". Maybe Solandro can bee seen as a variety of Nones, to be explained in the Nones article. For linguists to write more about this.  Andreas  ^(T) 12:42, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Pronunciation of Urtijëi (from Talk:South Tyrol)

I don't know how to insert IPA-Codes on my keyboard, so I tried with SAMPA: Urtijëi is pronounced urtiZ3i, where the "j" is pronounced as in the french word jour and the "ë" like the german besser - hope, this helps.--Sajoch (talk) 19:03, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for this. Unfurtunately, we cannot use this becaus it is WP:Original research, we need a source for the pronunciation (no offence).  Andreas  ^(T) 23:39, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

I am from Urtijëi and speak ladin - what better source could you expect? ;-)

If you want to hear someone pronounce this name, you may look at a video on Youtube, where the speaker says (at the beginning) "cor di jëuni d'Urtijëi mo n iede".--Sajoch (talk) 09:20, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

I have to admit that there are scores of unsourced pronuciation entries in Wikipedia. I want to refer to the article on Ladin in the German WP and propose: [urtiˈʒəi].  Andreas  ^(T) 14:52, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Hummm. The ladin "j" is definately pronouced like in the french word "jour". The "ë" is more difficult to explain. The SAMPA-page tells me that "ə" is like in german "bitte", while "6" (cannot type the headlong "a") sounds like the end of the german "besser" - which I deem more to the point. I would even consider "3" (the mirrored epsilon) appropriate. Please also listen to and hear for yourself.--Sajoch (talk) 15:30, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

I have serious doubts regarding the vowel qualities in your IPA transcription. My original research version would be: [ɯʀtɪˈʒɛj] ;-) Problem solved? --Mai-Sachme (talk) 15:35, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm no expert, and sincerely I don't get the subtle difference between "u" and headlong-"m" and between "r" and "R" - but I agree with the second part of the transcription. I could also register "Sëlva" - but there's really no magic in this name besides the "ë", or - more challenging for an IPA-transcription - the name "Gherdëina". :-)--Sajoch (talk) 16:10, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

If you have fun doing this, I think no one will object to your recordings, which I deem even more useful than a transcription :-) I'm looking forward to listen to Sëlva and Santa Cristina Gherdëina. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 16:18, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I'm getting my fun doing this: , , , .--Sajoch (talk) 16:51, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

The article on the Ladin language lacks a phonology section as it is present in most other articles. I don't thik this page is the place to discuss phonetics and I would suggest to pospone the decision on the presentaton of the pronunciation until the phonology of Ladin is adequately documented. Any takers?  Andreas  ^(T) 16:27, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree that we need a reliable source for proper IPA transcriptions. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 17:00, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

I see nothing wrong with discussing it here. But maybe Talk:Ladin language would also be a good place. Gryffindor (talk) 18:13, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

How about writing the Istitut Ladin Micurà de Rü? They are paid for by the province to study and preserve Ladin and have published dictionaries, maps, language courses, ecc. I have worked with the director of the Institute Moroder before and back then he spoke about setting up a Ladin wikipedia, if he gets more staff for working on that. I think they should start right now on helping us with the Ladin articles, especially the IPA codes for the toponyms. (which is already included in the dictionaries they have published [1]). If there is a consensus here that we should get them involved I will write an email and suggest they open a wiki-account under their name to edit all the relevant Ladin articles. Naturally we will have to help them togehter at the beginning with editing, style, referencing ecc. As said: I would like to know if this idea has some support here, before I write an email to them [2]. noclador (talk) 19:02, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a unique opportunity for the Ladins to get a, well, notable online text corpus. I think their first goal should be to start their own language version (maybe focussing on local topics). Unfortunately, the current beta-version has been quite inactive for a while now. If they really want to edit articles on the English wikipedia, I'll be willing to support them, answer questions (also via e-mail), review their edits and so on (although I guess they should give the Ladin wikipedia a higher priority).

Are you sure that their dictionaries include an IPA transcription? I may be wrong, but I think I had a look at the printed versions recently, and I didn't find anything. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 19:44, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

how many native speakers?

Common knowledge says about 30.000 native ladin speakers, but some suggest there are more. Let's try to enumerate them:

valley	inhabitants	native ladin speakers	ladins
Val Badia	10644	95%	9229
Gherdëina	10128	80%	8148
Fascia	91252001	66%	7553[3]
Fodom	1405	78%	1096
Anpezo	6097	33%	2012
Bolzano	997642006	0,71%	708
Bruneck	145072006	1,95%	283
total			29029

undue weight to doubtful ladin communes

I've cleaned the article from references to dozens of communes which are not considered ladin (neither historically nor backed up by scientific data). Their "ladin status" is merely of political nature to gain more rights and financial support. Studies like the extensive one done by Roland Bauer show they are clearly related to trentinian dialects (87%~97% similarity) rather than the ladin dialects of Gherdeina and Val Badia (only 41%~50% similarity) [4].--Sajoch (talk) 20:44, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Of course you can cite a scholar's minoritary opinion. But you cannot ignore the declarations of thousand of Ladins declaring their mother language at the census. Nor can you ignore that the Ladin area comprises several municipalities in Belluno.--Patavium (talk) 21:02, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

I do not ignore scientic findings and up-to-date data. Your edits instead are of clear political motivation. We should not cite politics, but scientic facts. I've described each single edit, while you have reverted all reintroducing lots of errors. Do not do that again!--Sajoch (talk) 23:37, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Did you read the sources? The Ladin area is defined very precisely and should be presented as such.

If you do not know what areas in Italy are recognized as Ladin, if you do not know where people declare themselves as Ladins at the census, if you do not know the classification of the language, please let this page alone.

And stop trying to make a linguistic issue a political one.--Patavium (talk) 19:38, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I read the sources. They clearly state that:

• the ladin area is nowhere precisely defined (see also "questione ladina")
• this page is not about politics (official recognition), but about the language and its usage
• recent scientific studies show, that Nones as well as most dialects in Belluno are italian dialects rather than ladin ones (see Prof. Dr. Roland BurgerBauer)
• in the census of 2011 78% of people from Val di Non dit not declare themselves ladin, as they didn't want to play that political game.

So in all respects, Nones and other semi-ladin dialects may be mentioned but should not be included as "ladin" without objection--Sajoch (talk) 09:06, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

{{3O}} I saw this dispute listed at the Third Opinion project and have left it listed there in case someone wishes to give an opinion. I do not care to do so, but would like to make a comment to both of you. I note that both of you are relative newcomers. Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for trying to improve the encyclopedia. I've been around for awhile and have seen quite a few disputes like this one. Both of you are trying to edit the article based upon general principles — what's best in a general sense or what's right in a general sense — rather than on the basis of Wikipedia principles. You've become frustrated with one another and have decided to appeal to the Wikipedia community. The problem is that you're probably going to find that the community will not be willing to help you work out your dispute in the way you've been going about it. Indeed, you may find that some or all of the content that you've been fighting over is not acceptable to Wikipedia in either of your disputed versions. While I do not care to directly address your dispute, let me say that the basic Wikipedia principles for working it our can be found in the Verifiability policy and other policies and guidelines linked from there and also, perhaps, in the Undue Weight and/or Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information policies. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 14:10, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Sajoch is mistaken. In all articles about languages there is an indication of where it is spoken, where it is official, where it is recognized etc.

Of course there are differences among the Ladin dialects. In fact, there is an entire section dedicated to the different types of Ladin.

And sorry, but I did not find a linguist specialized in Ladin language named Prof. Roland Burger. Who is he?--Patavium (talk) 18:43, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Prof Roland Bauer is the most reputable researcher on ladin language to date: professor of "Romance studies" at the Salzburg University, editorial director of the "Ladinia" journal, and much more (see [5] and [6]). You know him very well. You also stated (on the german Wikipedia), that he is an excellent source (see [7]). Thanks for your answer, your intentions are debunked.--Sajoch (talk) 19:07, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

That's funny. Roland Burger or Roland Bauer? In fact I only know the latter. He is a German-speaking researcher, but not the most reputable please.

What intentions?--Patavium (talk) 19:23, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, Burger was obviously a typo - I also mentioned Bauer above - we cited him several times, and you know that. There are no doubts about his and his teams qualification and the "Istituto Micurà de Rü"[8] for anything regarding the ladin language. Hopefully a third party will follow the above links and see for himself.--Sajoch (talk) 19:35, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Patavium, I think as a start, in order to avoid further edit warring, you could try to discuss at least three things before you insert your controversial edits again:

• Name your sources! Without an exception, since you added unsourced material.
• Don't give single sources undue weight. You've got one single ref for the statement: According to modern linguistics. Please specify what the source is exactly saying. Is Mário Eduardo Viaro saying this litteraly? Or is he one example of "modern linguistics"? And how come there are other "modern linguists" who don't divide into six major groups?
• And we should really think about deleting these horrible municipality-boxes at all. We're writing an encyclopedic article about a language, not a statistical survey. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 21:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I already found Viaro's paper. As expected he doesn't say a word about modern linguistics, which leads me to the conclusion that you inferred from one single source that a whole science is unanimously holding that view. That's what I call a bad start... --Mai-Sachme (talk) 21:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

The sources have been named all. The present version of the article is full of mistakes and it conceals relevant information.--Patavium (talk) 22:14, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Nothing here is controversial. The controversy actually arises from immotivated denial.

I tried to delete some of the municipality-boxes. Anyway, I thought they were quite informative.

I erased the expression modern linguistic.--Patavium (talk) 22:24, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

You're the paradigm of controversy: here you define Bauer as a scholar with a minority opinion and not the most reputable, while on italian Wikipedia you request that a graphic with his findings be restored despite it being deleted for copyright violation (see here). :-(--Sajoch (talk) 09:42, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

I am not an expert on images and I never ever uploaded any image, in order to avoid copyright issues.

Paradigm of controversy? If you have a problem with Italian Wikipedia, then make your postings there, if you can :-))

Thank you for confirming that the erased image was based on Bauer's work. In fact, the image was a map indicating that the Western Trentinian territories are to be considered as Anaunic Ladin. Now you are trying to conceal Ladin linguistic identity of Non Valley and of Belluno.--Patavium (talk) 11:33, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

This is the map we're talking about: it does not tell us what you want it to tell. Instead the map shows us, that Noneso (ladino anaunico) is more similar to trentino lombardo than to the ladino dolomitico. Similar maps exist also for the province of Belluno. And if you read the summary of Bauers work[9], you'll see, that he clearly states that Noneso is not ladin, but a trentinian dialect. q.e.d.--Sajoch (talk) 12:57, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

I can hardly understand your point. In the map Bauer identifies the dialects as Ladino Anaunico.

As to the nature of Nones and Solandro, there are two extensive passages basically stating what Bauer says, namely there is a strong relationship to Trentinian.

I disagree with your removing the numbers in Ladin. You said "-ballast: counting till 20 is very similar in all romance languages and not a prominent distinguishing feature". Do you want to conceal that Ladin is a romance language? Hopefully not. The numbers should be reintroduced in the article.--Patavium (talk) 20:36, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Finally you admit, that Nones has a strong relatinship with Trentinian. "Ladino Anaunico" ist not the same as "Ladino" or "Ladino Dolomitico", don't confuse the terms! And about the tables with numbers you didn't reach consensus to include them.--Sajoch (talk) 01:42, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

I have been writing it since the beginning. Would you please reinsert the numbers in Ladin?--Patavium (talk) 18:53, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Response to third opinion request:

I will not wade too deep into factual matters on this third opinion. My main input is that if there are disagreements between census data and political designations, then the article should include both pieces of information. We don't have to decide which is right, we can just say what each source says. If there are other sources that have analysis of the data and talk about how it is inaccurate, then we can cite those sources. We can't claim that the data is biased unless some other reliable source has done so first, and then we must use a citation to that source, and we probably should not present the criticism as factual, but rather the opinion of the source making the claim. This is the way that we help to avoid needing to decide what is right and what isn't. Please see WP:PSTS and WP:NOR for guidance if you have not already read them recently. Gigs (talk) 15:53, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

New map

Languages of South tyrol and Trentino

I've created a combined map with all available data (current as of census 2011) from South Tyrol and Trentino showing the language distribution. I think we may substitute the other two maps with this one.--Sajoch (talk) 23:09, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

This map not complete. Of the municipalities where Ladin is spoken and recognized, the majority is in Belluno.

So at the moment it is better to have distinct maps for each province.--Patavium (talk) 19:40, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

This map clearly shows South Tyrol and Trentino only, and in this respect it is complete and correct with up-to-date data. I would add also the province of Belluno, but official census data for it does not exist.--Sajoch (talk) 08:58, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

the majority is in Belluno?!? About 3000 people of around 30.000 ladins is only 10%. Mathematics tells me that you're pulling my leg. Your deceptive assertions are not welcome here.--Sajoch (talk) 00:48, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Actually you have a problem with maths. Only counting Trentino and South Tyrol you get 40,000 Ladins. The whole of the recognized Ladin territory amount to 92,000 inhabitants. The difference is 52,000 > 40,000.

You don not need to radicalize the discussion with false allegations. Thank you.--Patavium (talk) 11:41, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

No way all of those 92000 inhabitants are ladins. You mix different numbers. You know that.--Sajoch (talk) 12:42, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

For Belluno there are no numbers. Potentially they could be from 0 to 52,000.

Please do not change the number of municipalities of the 2001 Trentinian census. At that time, there were more communes than nowadays. Please inform yourself.--Patavium (talk) 20:27, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Therefore stop it using the edit summary for utterly incovenient remarks such as: "repeating for the nth time various errors - lets correct at least those". Thanks.--Patavium (talk) 20:40, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Census data of 2011 is available (see map here on the right!) - don't revert to outdated data, also undoing other corrections! That's considered vandalism.--Sajoch (talk) 01:38, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

I told you to stop with false allegations. The map was created on the basis of the census 2001, at that time there were more comunes than now. You cannot manipulate the 2001 census, based on 223 comunes, by changing the number of comunes to 217. Is this clear to you?--Patavium (talk) 18:50, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

You're working with outdated data! The solution is simple: I'll substitute the map with an up2date one.--Sajoch (talk) 01:28, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

The map is not ok. You used an old map and put new figures from 2011 on it. First you should redraw the map so that it is correct.--Patavium (talk) 20:10, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

The adjustments refer to municipalities outside the ladin area. Correcting those gray lines would not affect the overall outcome. Nevertheless I already told you (on german wikipedia), that I'll implement those small correction asap. Please be patient.--Sajoch (talk) 20:20, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

It's fine. But in the meantime we should not post a map that is not precise.--Patavium (talk) 20:40, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

The information is in the colors. There's no wrong color on that map! The gray lines are meaningless - nowhere is written what they stand for. Please do not remove correct and informative maps!--Sajoch (talk) 21:20, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry but the map is wrong. You cannot put the census 2011 on a map where the comunes are as of 2001.--Patavium (talk) 19:45, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

The map is fine. The minor changes regarding the adiminstrative units don't affect the essential information of the map: showing to readers where in the region the Ladin language is spoken. Sajoch has assured that he will correct the municipality borders as soon as possible, so there's no need for an extended discussion, an edit war or a overhasty removal. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 21:51, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

In fact there is no need for discussion. The map should be removed as it is wrong and when it has been corrected it can be reinserted.--Patavium (talk) 17:17, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Now the maps are better. There is still the problem that Mocheno and Cimbrian population were made German by Sajoch while they are detached linguistic groups. The census in Trentino does not assess the number of German-speakers, unfortunately the map makes the reader believe this.--Patavium (talk) 19:34, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Reverting due to a typo?

Here I see only a typo: "reserch" instead of "research". The substance of the sentence is correct and exposes the findinds by Prof Bauer. There was no reason to revert it!--Sajoch (talk) 20:28, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Please write in a better form of English. And I did not mean the ortographic mistake.

Bauer shows that the dialects in southern Fassa, in former Tyrolean Belluno and in Comelico have the same level of difference from South Tyrolean Ladin. He does not say that they are similar to Venetian.--Patavium (talk) 20:35, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

We're not talking about Fassa, and former Tyrolean municipalities of Belluno! It's the other numerous municipalities, that the administration has "decided" to give a "ladin-minority-status", while findings of Bauer show, that the language spoken in those communes is a Venetian dialect. Please see also this graph, where "Comelico" is taken as pivotal point: Ladin Dolomitan is quite different (blue), while the similarity with Venetian and other northern-italian dialects (yellow) cannot be denied. Or this map, that shows how unite the dialects in the valleys around the Sella are (dark blue), while other areas in Belluno and Val di Non (predominantly green) are clearly different. The Friulan and Rumanc languages (red and light red) are much more similar to Ladin.--Sajoch (talk) 21:02, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

So what? Ladin is a complex language. I will give you an example: some Ladins say rujeneda, others lengaz for language.

In any case Ladin is different from Venetian and especially Comelican Ladin is regarded as Ladin also by German-speaking scholars as Kaltenbusch.

As to the influence by Venetian and Trentinian, they are mentioned in the article. But we not regard Ladin in Gherdeina as German, just because as other scholars have pointed out that Germanic influence has increased particularly.--Patavium (talk) 19:58, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

That's funny. Kaltenbusch or Kattenbusch? In fact I only know the latter.

Anyway, the current article lacks the information that it's pretty unclear within the scietific community which dialects can be labelled as Ladin, semi-Ladin, surely not Ladin, Ladin in a different meaning and so on. You'll find for almost each viewpoint a source... Both of you should stop to favour a specific viewpoint, the scientific debate about the extent of the term Ladin is unresolved, it's just our job to write that. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 21:33, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Again Patavium reverted much more, than whats needed. If he feels a sentence or a word is wrong, he should correct only the sentence/word, not all modifications the other person did!!!

It's correct we have to report all versions, if it's not clear who's right or wrong. Also the third opinion suggested so. As the article is now, there's no mention that the dialects in Belluno south of Ampezzo are by many not considered to be ladin dialects. That information is missing! Even worse: the listing of all municipalities mentioned in a recent law leads to the false assumption, that all or most of those inhabitants speak ladin, thus inducing, that there are about 70,000 ladins in this area. So adding those from Soutn Tyrol and Trentino, we are all of sudden around 110,000 ladins?!?--Sajoch (talk) 23:29, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

The reader of this page should turn to "view history" in order to see who made massive reverts.

It's Dieter Kattenbusch. Where do 23,000 Ladins in South Tyrol come from?--Patavium (talk) 16:58, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

I think that it was a useful information to indicate that in the area recognized as Ladin the inhabitants are 92,000. Consider that most readers have no idea that this is a very sparsely inhabitated are.--Patavium (talk) 17:09, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

We cannot use the number 92,000 - there's no source telling us those are all ladin speakers, or which percentage speaks ladin.

This document tells us, that 20,548 are 4.53% of 453,272 people. During the 2011 census not all people declared their language or made invalid declarations. The same document also states, that the inhabitants in South Tyrol are 505,067, or more up-to-date 511,750 (see South Tyrol). Thus the projected total of ladin speakers in South Tyrol is more like 22,880 or 23,182. As the ASTAT-institute doesn't give those projections, the statement "about 23,000" is the more accurate we can deliver.--Sajoch (talk) 17:15, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Oh no. The information that 92,000 people live in the Ladin area is correct, as it does not say if they are Ladin or not. The article is very clear about it. It is not possible to assess the exact number of Ladin speakers, because only in the provinces of South Tyrol and Trentino the inhabitants declare their native language on the occasion of the general census of the population, which takes place every ten years.

As to the invented 23,000. After slightly manipulating the map now you massively manipulate data. Did you make the projections on the whole population, including foreigners which mostly live outside of the Ladin area? "You" deliver manipulated data.--Patavium (talk) 17:30, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

The maps are updated. Now anyone can see, there was no manipulation of data: the colors remained untouched. Please stop your unfounded accusations.--Sajoch (talk) 18:03, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Do not call them accusations. Another map created by you has the same problem. The problem is that you seem to have little information about Trentino (and I include Belluno).

And this manipulating the data of ASTAT makes me fear that this applies to South Tyrol. Your manipulation is quite evident. You cannot take the data of a census for one year and applicate them to another year. This is a mess.--Patavium (talk) 18:58, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Calm down and reload that map!--Sajoch (talk) 19:02, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Now it has been corrected, after a lot of insisting and the necessity of another user intervening.--Patavium (talk) 19:08, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

No comment! I hope that "other user" will straighten your distorted viewpoint.--Sajoch (talk) 19:18, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Your viewpoint is that you continue ignoring what the census really says. See my comments above.--Patavium (talk) 19:36, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

2011 census data

The documents citing census data of 2011 for South Tyrol and Trentino use different metrics we cannot ignore. In South Tyrol only 453,272 out of 505,067 people (89.7%) declared their affiliation to a language minority. On the other hand in Trentino all citizens were counted: of 526,510 inhabitants, 18,550 declared ladin as their mother-language. If we want comparable data, we have to project the data from South Tyrol, which can reliably be done with the available numbers (also the 4.53% is an official number given by the ASTAT). Thus the ladins in South Tyrol are 22,880 (=505,067*4.53%), or (to account for the fact that this is only a projection) "around 23,000". Simple calculations are not considered original research!--Sajoch (talk) 19:59, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Please do not manipulate the census. You cannot take the population of South Tyrol as of date XX.YY.ZZZZ and apply the percentages of the census 2011. The census was calculated on Italian citizens, while the population includes foreigners. Yours is not a simple but a wrong calculation.--Patavium (talk) 21:13, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

You're the one, that repeatedly abuses sources to "show" something. You cannot compare apples and oranges. In Trentino all people were counted - to have comparable numbers we have to give the total number of ladins in South Tyrol, not only the ones, that made a declaration. I inserted both numbers (all data is from the same document, same census - no mixing of dates!).

On ther other hand you try to insinuate that the number of ladins in South Tyrol is bloated, by writing the number of Ladin-speakers was significantly lower.... But that's not true: a 9% increase in 10 years is equivalent to the average for the whole region (population increased from 460.635 to 505.067, that's a 9,6% increase). If you want to tell something about the demographic evolution, you may add a separate section.--Sajoch (talk) 10:58, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

As I said, you have little knowledge about Trentino.

As to South Tyrol. The population increased by immigration, the citizens remained stable. Only citizens declare they language group. So an increase by nearly 2,000 is significant. What you are doing is making thousand of Albanians and Moroccans Ladin speakers. You falsify everything.

You should stop inventing estimates. In South Tyrol there is a census. In Belluno there is not, therefore there are estimates.--Patavium (talk) 19:09, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Again you're wrong with your assumptions. The census separately determines membership to a language-group and attribution to one of the groups. The difference is 0,01%. However you calculate, the projection gives about 22,800 ladins. Also in Trentino the census counted the attribution to one of the groups. Otherwise in Trentino no one in Val di Non could have declared themseves ladins: they simply attributed themselves to the ladin-group. If we agree, that census data is ok, you should accept the numbers for what they are. If you don't, I'm curious about what better sources you have.--Sajoch (talk) 20:13, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately you are mistaken. In addition, you inserted a map where Mocheno and Cimbrians are presented as German. They are not, people are asked to declare if they belong to the Mocheno or Cimbrian group, not to the German one. So again, you manipulated the census. The map must be removed.--Patavium (talk) 19:21, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Mocheno and Cimbrian are both German dialects. I used different colors for different languages: blue=ladin, green=german (the same colors as for the South-Tyrolean map). Anything else would be misleading.--Sajoch (talk) 19:43, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

There is no German minority in Trentino. The census assesses Mocheno and Cimbrian minority. In fact Mocheno and Cimbrian are German dialects, but the census makes a clear distinction.--Patavium (talk) 17:52, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

The map is clear, it shows "language"-minorities, not "dialects". You even agree Cimbrian and Mocheno are German dialects, so what are you complaining about?!?--Sajoch (talk) 18:28, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

I repeat it for the nth time. In your map you write minority languages in Trentino - census 2011. But if your map is based on the census than you cannot put Ladin and German. You must distinguish between Ladin, Mocheno and Cimbrian as the census does.--Patavium (talk) 18:35, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

That's your opinion. I don't agree. You should learn to search a consensus instead of blindly reverting others work!--Sajoch (talk) 18:40, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Stop insinuating it is my opinion. It is the census. Full stop. If you want to manipulate a census, do it with other pages than Italy-related pages.

But your only objective is to damage Wikipedia. Otherwise you would not make reverts like this [10]. You inserted Kastelruth as a municipality with Ladin majority while it has a minority. I tried to correct your mistake and you insist with your wrong version. If you do it again, I will report you to the administrators.

Have a look here. 15° Censimento della popolazione e delle abitazioni Rilevazione sulla consistenza e la dislocazione territoriale degli appartenenti alle popolazioni di lingua ladina, mòchena e cimbra = 15th census of population and housing Enquiry about the number and the location of those who belong to the populatio of Ladin, Mocheno and Cimbrian language. Not a word about German language. If you continue abusing this discussion page in order to deny basics I will report you too.

And please do not make a mess between Trentino and South Tyrol (where the German group is assessed).--Patavium (talk) 18:55, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

The addition of Kastelruth is perfectly legal, as it has 3 subdivisions, where ladin is a majority and an officially used language. I also wrote that in the note, but you're reluctant to read. Admins and third opinions are welcome, I long for them.--Sajoch (talk) 19:15, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Massive manipulation of data

Sajoch is manipulating census data.

• Here he invents non existent estimates.
• Here he erases the data of the official census, calling it "deceptive insinuations"
• Here he reverts calling them "futile".
• On the contrary, in the article Mocheno language he inserts the census data he wants to erase on this page!--Patavium (talk) 22:18, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Controversial edits

Germanisation

Germanisation: In Tyrol there was a germanisation of the ladino-romantsch of the Venosta Valley (now Italy) promoted by the Austria in the XVI century. There was made for avoiding contact with Protestants of the Grigioni canton.

Storia dell'Alto Adige: Nell'alto medioevo cominciò il processo di germanizzazione dei territori alpini centrali, non densamente popolati, a spese dell'originaria popolazione retoromanza da parte di Longobardi, Franchi e soprattutto Baiuvari. Il territorio dell'odierno Alto Adige alla caduta dell'Impero Romano era infatti incluso nella regione di parlata retoromanza, che si estendeva dagli attuali Grigioni al Friuli. Nei secoli seguenti le popolazioni alpine, frammentate e prive di strutture politiche e sociali comuni, rimasero soggette a forti pressioni demografiche, culturali e linguistiche da parte delle popolazioni circumalpine. Sin dal VII secolo le lingue germaniche penetrarono nella regione, a partire dalla val Pusteria e dalla zona a nord di Merano verso le altre vallate. Nei secoli XII-XIII la penetrazione divenne generale, come testimoniano i documenti storici e la microtoponomastica ad oggi esistente. Strati neoromanzi erano presenti in val Venosta ancora nel XVI secolo, e lo sono tutt'oggi nelle valli ladine (Val Gardena, Marebbe e Val Badia). La germanizzazione dell'attuale Alto Adige, come di tutta la regione storica del Tirolo, fu dunque un processo lento, continuo e intenso e vide sia il progressivo arretramento delle popolazioni di cultura retoromanza (gli antenati degli attuali ladini) sia la conquista di nuovi spazi in precedenza disabitati come le valli laterali. Anche le epidemie cicliche, come la peste trecentesca e seicentesca, portarono a ingenti sostituzioni di popolazioni. La nobiltà e il clero d'Oltralpe furono i principali attori della germanizzazione capillare, possedendo ingenti latifondi nelle zone di Bolzano e Merano (a produzione prevalentemente vinicola). Tra i maggiori proprietari terrieri figuravano i vescovi di Augusta e Frisinga, i conventi di Schäftlarn, Herrenchiemsee e Weingarten nonché le casate degli Ariboni e degli Andechs. L'immigrazione germanica seguì due direttrici: i contadini germanici si stabilirono nelle vallate più settentrionali e remote, portando la lingua tedesca negli ambienti rurali delle valli; i commercianti tedeschi dalle zone austriache e della Germania meridionale, soprattutto della Baviera e della Svevia, si stabilirono invece nei centri urbani come Bolzano, Merano, Vipiteno e Brunico. [...] Non solo gli italiani, ma anche i ladini dell'Alto Adige furono colpiti dai provvedimenti germanizzatori delle autorità austriache. Nel caso della popolazione di lingua ladina la germanizzazione forzata aveva una lunga tradizione, minimizzata se non taciuta dalla storiografia tirolese di lingua tedesca. Come risultato di questa politica l'alta Val Venosta, un tempo di lingua ladina, è oggi una terra di lingua tedesca, mentre oltre il confine svizzero (in val Monastero) la popolazione ancora parla dialetti retoromanzi. Anche a Stelvio all'inizio del XIX secolo si parlava ancora ladino, mentre a Tubre la pulizia etnica aveva portato alla sua scomparsa già nel 1750. La lingua ladina era stata proibita, il personale di lingua ladina allontanato dagli uffici pubblici, vennero vietati pure i matrimoni misti. Il promotore principale della politica contro la popolazione ladina ("selvaggio romancio") fu un abate tirolese di lingua tedesca, Mathias Lang. Già ai tempi dell'imperatrice Maria Teresa molti cognomi ladini erano stati germanizzati sistematicamente, anticipando i provvedimenti presi dalle autorità fasciste nel XX secolo. Anche in Val Badia e Val Gardena vi furono massicci tentativi di germanizzare i ladini, che non furono però coronati da successo.

Ladins

People don't make statements, people can't make statements: Germans, Austrians, New Yorkers, all together don't approve or reject anything, just like Ladins. People don't have a single shared opinion! Even worse, people don't express ridiculous statements in quote (!!!) like "We are not Italians and since ever don't want to be considered as part of them! We are Tyroleans and we want to stay Tyroleans!" Who is this we? Anyone know them? The author has heard a choir, perhaps composed of all Ladins? No: the author is just Martin Klüners. This is a triumph of NNPOV.

Referenda

As above, again the same: the absurd request of a "bipartisan censorship". There are several reasons, so, we start by deleting one of the most important. Absolutely no sense. There is a whole article devoted only to this question: Questione dei comuni lombardi e veneti al confine con il Trentino-Alto Adige but, here, we must have a single sentence. Sic.

--Felisopus (talk) 15:36, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to tell you, but you're mixing a lot of different things. And italian Wikipedia is by any means not a reliable source.:-(--Sajoch (talk) 15:57, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Okay, let's have a go:

• Your addition included the following sentence: In the vast multi ethnic Holy Roman Empire and then after 1804 the Austrian empire, the Ladins were allowed to continue the use of their language and culture, despite being subjected to a process of germanization over the centuries. Is there any source for the claim, that the Holy Roman Empire and the Austrian empire pursued a policy of Germanisation against the Ladins? I'm not talking here about the invasion of Bavarian tribes in the Early Middle Ages, which is already covered in the article: Starting in the 6th century, the Bavarii started moving in from north, while from the south the Italian language started pushing in, which further shrank the original extent of the Ladin area. Only in the more remote mountain valleys was Ladin able to survive. I'm talking about a precisely targeted campaign your edit is implying. Funnily (and not surprisingly) the paragraph you copied from it.wikipedia stops at this point with the citation of sources. So please, cite reliable sources, not stuff you found on other wikipedias!
• By replacing a notion repeatedly rejected by the Ladins themselves with as all the neighboring romance languages (like lombard, friulian or venetian), a notion often rejected you exchanged a discussible statement, which needs (I give you that) a better wording, with several (!) other unsourced statements (all the neighboring? languages? a notion often rejected?) Sorry, but that's not useful, that makes the whole story worse... And I don't get what you are saying about the whole paragraph being unsourced.... The article is bad, so let's make it worse? Is this the spirit?
• Then you added despite the vote was also influenced by economic reasons. First of all, I'd recommend you to check the meaning of the word despite in a dictionary. The sentence made absolutely no sense the way you put it. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 16:23, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

I hope we all agree that this kind of behaviour is astonishing: "Hey, I've got trouble on en.wikipedia, don't have any sources and don't know much about the topic, so please go over there for me!" And surprise surprise: A total revert with the comment "Depov" (sic!), reinserting spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, unsourced claims, semantic nonsense... --Mai-Sachme (talk) 08:09, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Mai-Sachme. Please do not make totally false translations. This is not what Feliposus said.

Germanization should be mentioned as Italianization is.

And I would be very careful about statements regarding Ladin identity. In Comelico they would never come to the idea that they are Tyroleans, but Ladin is spoken there. And you forget that Austrians counted Ladins as Italians.

If there are mistakes in someone else's edits, they can be corrected. But systematic total reverts are unacceptable. As well as fake statistics.--Patavium (talk) 19:45, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Off topic. I was asking for academic sources for specific additions. When someone is adding unsourced material, a total revert is not only an option but a duty. Patavium, you know how it works: First we try to find academic sources, then we elaborate a proposal here and then we can edit the article. As long as you don't bring realiable sources, I'll have to think that these claims are your personal beliefs. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 20:55, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Well ,to make it easier for you:

Germanocentric Holy Roman Empire... Source?

extinction of Ladin culture and language in the territories confining with Swiss Graubünden... Relevance for this article here? Maybe the article you are looking for is Romansh language?

The attempts of assimilation... Source?

the development of an own Ladin consciousness in the 19th century helped stopping this process... Source?

preserving Ladin heritage... Source? --Mai-Sachme (talk) 21:38, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

It is always the same. If someone does not share your POV, then every single word must be sourced. Common knowledge, dear Mai-Sachme, must not be sourced. It was the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation. Never heard of it?

On the other side there is no source for 23,000 Ladins, but who cares.--Patavium (talk) 21:52, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Patavium, your edits seem a bit confused now, obviously the artice Romansh language is what you are looking for. And please grab a dictionary and check the meaning of the word "germanocentric". You'll be surprised that it doesn't mean only "Roman Empire of the German Nation". Patavium, I'm warning you: You've been blocked repeatedly on the German and Italian wikipedia for exactly this kind of behaviour. You insert your changes again without any discussions and I'll have to report you for breaking the 3RR.- --Mai-Sachme (talk) 22:22, 6 November 2012 (UTC)